Using film is also in many ways more challenging (if you care about your photos), and thus you're going to wind (pun intended) up learning a lot more about photography.
Disregarding what I said, film still has a very special color and look, as well as an often superior dynamic range. (Depending on film).
The grain also looks better, and it's possible to make huge enlargements without buying extremely expensive equipment / camera gear.
If you can't read what people post you should stop taking part in discussions.
And even then, if some people like using film just because it's film, then that is their choice, their hobby, and perhaps they like the extra challenge it adds to photography. It's a hobby, people do it because they think it's fun.
And even then, there's no reason for you to come barging into this thread with your hate on people who use film.
Most of the film photographers in this thread and around FP do it as a side-hobby to digital photography, as most of them have a digital SLR as well. It's personal pictures, it's going out to town and taking shots on the street and just for the hell of taking the pictures. It comes out nice, comes out cheap, and they don't have to take their expensive digital cameras and giant lenses out to heavy populated areas like a city where things could get stolen. No one pays attention to film cameras, even proper pro cameras have much smaller lenses and you can get better candid photos because no one notices you.
And you still seem to be completely ignoring the fact that film still got a very special kind of grain look on higher ISO levels, the possibility of being enlarged, and that it can be incredibly useful for becoming a better photographer.
By this point you're just ignoring arguments you know you can't argue against, so unless I'm just going to stop this here before it turns into a big flamefest or whatever.
here we go
Digital Vs Film: Advantage and Disadvantage, the slackening of the photographer's reliance on their own ability and technical quality vs image quality
Digital has brought on a new age in photography, opening a doorway for more inexperienced photographers to view instant results and adjust their settings and attitude to fix things on the spot. Memory cards enable you to take thousands of photos without swapping out film nor taking up space with film strips, prints, and physical storage. the up-side to the storage aside, it has completely killed a key element in taking a photo: making it right. Even more experienced and equipped photographers fall into the pitfall of thinking "I have all the storage in the world. I can just take this picture 20 times and pick which one looks best later". Then they lift their camera and clickclickclickclickclickclickclick. Maybe look at the pictures on the camera, then change position and clickclickclick.
It's good if you're in a bind, but terrible overall because it makes you lazy. You expect it to just work eventually, and it fills up your memory card and wastes your time both on location and when you're going through stuff to edit later. One thing I teach when someone want to learn photography is that they need to treat their digital photos like film. I do this by giving them a crappy 128mb memory card, which would allow maybe for 10-15 pictures on my camera. They're not allowed to look at or delete pictures, and I grade them on everything. Recently I made my friend buy me a drink for every 'bad' shot. He knew every picture counted, sitting and thinking out his shots, carefully framed everything, waited a few more seconds to think "is this right?", before finally taking the picture. EVERY picture was well thought out, not just clicked right away, and as such they all came out great. Though, he only took 9 pictures the whole time we were in town so I counted the 10th as a 'bad' and made him buy a drink anyways, heh.
Digital is also kind of a strain on quality. YES, you get a photo that's 2500x3600 pixels from a camera with an 8 megapixels sensor, and that's waaaay bigger than your computer monitor. You can print it at 300dpi and it'll look glorious on an 8x10 print, but when you print at higher DPI (magazine and advertising print, and large format photos), you begin to notice pixels, and realize that the quality of the lens that came with your camera (if it's even an SLR) is kind of fuzzy and distorts small details, which is made more apparent by the fact that you have a set resolution, so now pixels are shifty and just cause bad issues. The downside to even higher megapixel count is that, unless you spend several thousand dollars on your camera, the quality is probably going to be terrible, just bigger. I've seen cameras produce something at 14 megapixels that looks like it was run through a cotton candy machine, on its "good" settings.
If you're just printing 4x6 junk at a local store or something anyways, there honestly is no reason to bother with arguing digital or film, at that size- even with professional prints, you're not going to notice nor care how many megapixels the photo was taken in, nor the quality of the glass or how much time was spent in photoshop to make it look more filmish
In regards to what makes film applicable and useful, even to those with a digital SLR and great glass; it is a hobby end of the spectrum for all, and it isn't because it isn't mainstream nor because it feels ~deep~. If you want really think that's the only purpose to film, stop browsing tumblr, it's 99% hipster chicks sharing pictures of lightleaks, slide color film and pinhole camera successes.
Film is cheap and accessible to those who can't afford a big fancy digital but still want good quality photos with actual control over settings, especially the depth of field. That control, more than the sharpness of the picture when you zoom into somebody's fingernail, is what makes a picture look right. A $300 point and click with 14 megapixels and 10x optical and some retarded 100x digital zoom will NEVER compete with what you can get from a 35mm SLR you picked up from the local thrift store for $50 or so. I say let the tumblr hipsters play with their overpriced holgas and expired film, but a photographer- one who knows and respects photography, both hobbyist and professional alike, will truly understand the value of film. Not only in history, but in its continued use, its true value as a tool and a product, and as an invaluable lesson to apply to one's techniques and view on how they approach photography in the digital age.
I think both film and digital have their place in the world, but digital more so nowadays because of convenience
Try going from digital to film and see how you do. See how much you know about photography. With digital cameras today, you can just look at the screen and adjust everything.
I still really love film, I still use film a lot, and I have for about 6 years.
But when I got my DSLR in april, it opened up a whole new world for me
I could just go out and shoot whenever I wanted, I never felt restricted by anything, it was amazing.
I think my digital shots have been a lot worse quality than my film ones, but I'm starting to get over the rush of just shooting, and I'm focusing a bit more.
They're both great in their own ways.
Okay I need some help. Me being a noob and liking to fiddle with things may have caused some problems. I finally took the film out of my camera by using the rewind stuff and what not. But I tried to replace the film to kind of practice before I got the film I actually needed. After I put the film back in place, I tried the advance lever but it was still loose and the film was not advancing. So I closed it up, wond it up and the film all went back in the canister (the L too). Too add to it when I look through th viewfinder I cannot see anything. I fear I have done something very bad or it's something obvious but any input would help. If I take the lens off, I just see Like black nothing so it looks like the shutter is closed. I can post pictures if necessary. It's a pentax me super. Thanks.
what camera are you using? check the manual for mirror lock-up and how to enable/disable it if your camera has it
press the shutter again, might have mirror lock up or something
Pressed shutter. Nothing happens.
read that somewhere but it seems sketchy. I will look into the mirror lockup more.
Could it be a dead battery too?
I'm stupid. Working now.
I've been meaning to get a DSLR for some time, but thought I'd try my hand at some film first.
Any ideas on what model to get/where to get it?
I bought a pretty nice Yashica mat 124 TLR for 30 bucks, then cost me $20 to have a guy clean the insides up for me.
One of my favorite cameras.
Just got a call from my uncle. He heard I liked shooting with slr's lately and said he had a lot of darkroom stuff lying around plus a few cameras with a load of lenses and all kinds of shit. I could buy it from him for a small price.
I don't know all the details of the stuff and cameras and how much he wants for it, but I'll go have a look some time.
Well, I'm stoked
You guys seem to like the Olympus OM series cameras. Why do you like them so much?
I have 3 films of 36 exp Fujifilm Superia 200, anyone want?
gibe film pls shep to ussa
It won't really be cost effective to send one roll to one person, because postage will be almost the price of a new roll
cueball got there first, sorry guys
Requesting some assistance, pl0x.
Alright, so I've had this Canon AE-1 Program for just a short time. Before I had received it, there was a battery put into the camera prior and it's been in there for quite some time. Well, recently, the battery died; I went and got a new one. So, as you can see in the picture, the door that is holding the battery snapped off a little bit when I was loading in the new battery. It's the part that springs open, it like ripped away from the rest of the plastic, so now it just sticks out. I have the new battery in and everything, but will this directly affect the way my camera functions or takes pictures? Will I get any harsh light leakage from this, or will the battery not function correctly? Any help is appreciated, thank you.
Duct tape it up to fuck. If you think you've got enough, add twice as much.